Markos Moulitsas: "The Backup Nominee Is Joe Biden"

I didn't mean to do this twice, but events compel a few questions. Markos Moulitsas, a strong Clinton person, is apparently a strong anti-Sanders person as well. Either that or his friends-with-connections whispered something into his ear that he repeated out loud. Or both.

"The Backup Nominee is Joe Biden"

Note this brief exchange on his own site, Daily Kos. Moulitsas wrote a piece about how Bernie Sanders' campaign manager was "delusional" if he thought Sanders was going to win the nomination by using super-delegates to upset the pledged delegate vote, which he assumes will be Clinton's. No problem; it's his right to think and say so.

In particular, he wrote this (italics in original; my underscores):

There are two candidates. No one else has delegates. By definition, someone will have a majority of pledged delegates. What that candidate won’t have is a majority of all delegates, including the supers. But who cares? The only count that matters is pledged delegates. And if Sanders stages the biggest comeback in anything history to win a majority of pledged delegates? Kudos to him! He will have earned the nomination!

But pretending that 1) we’re going to have a brokered convention, when the math literally says it’s impossible, and 2) pretending that the super delegates would abandon Clinton for him despite his historical and current antipathy toward the Democratic Party is simply delusional.

Now to the comments section. One writer, ManhattanMan, added a reply that included this (bolding in original; my underscore):

If (God forbid) something happens to seriously damage Hillary’s electability, we’ll be thankful to have a backup nominee with a few million votes to his name. Ya never know. Safe is better than sorry.

The backup nominee is Joe Biden. Not sure why Bernie people think it would go to their guy…

Let's unpack that.

Would the Democratic Super-Delegates Nominate Biden Over Sanders?

I think, putting it all together, Markos is saying:

Clinton will arrive at the convention with a majority of pledged delegates.

The super-delegates will add to her total.

But if Clinton is suddenly seen as unelectable ... what?

She would instruct her delegates to vote for Joe Biden, and

The super-delegates would follow suit?

I think that's what he's saying. So three questions for Moulitsas:

Is he really suggesting that should "something" damage her electability, the convention would nominate Joe Biden instead of Bernie Sanders?

How does he know this? (Oh please, do share!)

Does this remark — "Not sure why Bernie people think it would go to their guy" — sounds as sneering as it seems to sound?

After all, there's a small matter of Sanders winning all those states and delegates, against Biden winning exactly zero of each. Maybe that's why Bernie people might think "it would go to their guy."

Two from me and I'm done. First, I really would like an answer to those questions, all three of them. Second, if this ever occurs, that Biden is the annointed nominee, Moulitsas can kiss the Party goodbye. Sanders supporters are its future. All Joe Biden can be is the Hubert Humphrey of 2016, his last act as a politician and his legacy.

Have You Helped Your Candidate Yet?

Blue America has endorsed Bernie Sanders for president. If you agree with his policies, is it:

14 Comments:

Moulitsas seems not to have gamed out the scenario and like you suggest,let his bias speak to the answer of sudden electile-dysfunction.

There would be a some major tooth gnashing at the convention and across the nationwere either party to put up for nomination a candidate who has not campaigned and debated.

It is so interesting to see journalists attached to a candidate unable to see their own bias to the point they suggest the party can subvert the will of the electorate. It's dumbfounding to see supposed 'Democratic' party members suggesting this is proper.

Whatever happens ..its showing me that our two party system is broken, we can't "fix" or take over the Democratic Party as Howard Dean once suggested and REAL change..IE the kind of change we Sanders Supporters want is going to happen outside of the Democratic Party

Thank you for this. As a long-time member of the Daily Kos community, I am increasingly puzzled by the harshness of Kos' recent posts.

The oddest thing, for me, is that assuming his gal is the candidate, aren't they going to want to have those who voted for Bernie in their corner? If so, snide comment after snide comment might not be the way to do it. It's so strange to me...

After sending out his stance against Bernie this AM (the delusional thread) then later in the day, his website decided to send out a call for donations. Is he the delusional one, that pissing off all the Bernie Sanders supporters in the AM and then assuming complete stupidity and asking for DKOS campaign funds....wowzer.

I can see Kos telling everyone to fall in line behind Hillary for the general if she's the nominee--I mean it's a dem site. But when there is a genuine progressive running for the dem nomination, you would expect him to be at least neutral. Not sure how he squares that with his slogan of More and Better Democrats. I mean if neutral he could still remain his true self as a dem party shill, but at least he could maintain his fiction as a progressive.

The same thing is happening with Paul Krugman. 1/3 of his recent columns have been vitriolic Bernie-slams. Then comes a comment section with a bunch of upset Bernie supporters who are hurt because until now Paul K. has been their hero. It makes me wonder what is going on. Also, what's with Obama endorsing the opponent of everyone dwt supports. He had been so much less disappointing lately until this.

Is it just me, or has anyone else come to the conclusion that Hillary Clinton corrupts everybody associated with her? So far, she's got the State Department and her assistants to lie about the emails, James Comey to slow-pedal the investigation into the emails, the neoliberal-owned media and pundits to print and leak what she tells them to, her supporters/celebrity friends/politicians/Obama to hint that Bernie should pack it in and he's a sexist/incompetent/ignorant/gun-loving/communist/non-Democrat. Hill & Bill, spreading corruption wherever they go, again.

First, nothing new with Kos or its founder. MM has been running with the big money now for several years. We should all, and I MEAN NOW, lose our links to Kos forever. It's a waste of time.

To Marilyn: That conclusion is a trivial one to have made back in the early '80s, much less today. Bill was a founder of the DLC which had one and only one purpose... to sell policy for campaign money and future private riches. And we all know how SUCCESSFUL they've become... so... ergo... need I extrapolate?

Their minions will naturally lie for them... but it isn't necessarily out of personal loyalty or fealty... it's because the same big money lies in THEIR futures too... Some of that gravy is scheduled to be splashed on THEIR taters too.

And to GP: Well said. I, too, remember 1968 and HH and the Chicago police riots when the D kingmakers finagled the nom for 1968's version of Kerry (the BETTER warmaker) and eschewed the anti-war sect of the party.

If the D sect of the money fail to nominate Bernie, the sect of the money calling itself "Democrats" SHOULD go poof... and they will.

If Bernie is robbed, he should make a deal with the Greens and run against both herr drumpf and hillbillary and see what happens. I SUSPECT he'd get more states and more popular votes than either of the moneywhores.

Of course, if nobody gets 270 electors (btw: I THINK that electors are not absolutely sworn to go the way their state went... something to ponder), that just means that the election goes to the house and the money wins anyway... but the Ds, by coming in last, might just go poof. 'Bout time that electoral college went poof too.